3 ms·

But before that the majority of human history has either both parents or both parents and the children (as they are able) helping out to sustain the family. We

• dragonwriter 12y ago
  > But before that the majority of human history has either both parents or both parents and the children (as they are able) helping out to sustain the family. For most of that history, much of that "helping out to sustain the family" did not mean "working in wage labor". In two parent homes of, say, the 1950s with one parent working outside the home, the other one was also engaged in work to "sustain the family", it just wasn't work for an outside capitalist that sustained the family through a paycheck.
  • wavefunction 12y ago
    Indeed, I'm saying the period of the 1950s up until recently was an _anomaly_ that allowed one parent to work for wages while the other stayed at home to manage the home while the children had relatively little responsibility compared to thousands of years previous.
• Torgo 12y ago
  Yet some people here think it would be feasible to skip completely over one working parent all the way to no working parent, via guaranteed income. I personally think it's not, but I can see how it's appealing since it sidesteps the fear that a single worker household would cause a reversal of women's liberation, without appearing to be in favor of equality of suffering under wage work.